Initial Officer Selection

[JMA]

Here we may observe an fundamental difference in leadership culture between German (until 1960) and Anglo-American. The officer losses of the German ground forces in WW2were much higher than US or UK losses of the same rank - generals ~10 times higher. People who know much more about military history than me attribute the leading up-front for both, the higher losses and the higher performance of the German ground forces.

A 10 times higher casualty rate for generals? Have you not considered that rather than this being a virtue this may have been a serious problem?

I suggest the initial higher performance of the German Army was due to their being better prepared at the start of the hostilities. But never underestimate the yanks, they a fast learners, which they certainly did after they got a bloody nose at Kasserine Pass. and the rest is history.

Serving with the ranks means an officer applicant has a chance to experience very early how his future subordinates tick. In an all-volunteer force the basic training for OC and enlisted men should have the same quality, so this time is well spent IMHO.

One needs to manage career time very carefully. There is a short 30 years to get to general staff (Brigadier) which would make you 48-50 (which is pushing the limits IMHO). Now if you take four years out of that for officer training and later a university degree and say 15+ years to Lt Col means the brightest would get there at 45-47 while the norm will be to make it just in time and get to stay on for another five years (talking loosely about the US system in terms of age here). Having generals over 60 is ridiculous and they should be put on pension and out to pasture at or before the age of 60.

Having done the 'enlisted' recruit training and then it all again on officers course I see it like this. The principle difference would be that on a recruits course you are taught to be rifleman and how to take part in the various phases of war (as a rifleman) and how to use the various platoon weapons. On the other hand the officer needs to approach all training from the position of commanding a platoon in the various phases of war (through an understanding of the roles and duties of all the ranks in these activities). With weapons he must both learn how to use them as well as how to employ them. I found higher quality (and rank) NCOs as instructors on my officers course which was to be expected.

I don't regret my short time in the ranks before being commissioned (12 months) as I certainly learned a lot and it helped me settle in quickly (quicker) as a 2Lt, but I do believe that officer training should be geared to producing an officer capable of commanding a platoon from day one rather than relying on previous service to give him the confidence to do the job. The training itself must be good enough to achieve that.

Another side effect is, you could observe whether the officer candidate has leadership potential, maybe a chance for bottom-up selection.

A longer time as platoon leader was used to give the officer the opportunity to serve in other units, develop a deeper understanding of the other elements in his regiment or division. The highest priority had the applied tactics, this meant combined arms warefare after 1919.

Who observes? If the man with possible officer potential is in a platoon who is there to observe him? A Lt or 2Lt? Too light for that task. The NCOs? Not sure that NCOs of sergeant down are the best to identify officer potential.

Again IMHO it is a case of how much time you can devote to this preliminary background learning. If on is to set a minimum time served I would say a year (being half training and half in a platoon - hopefully on active service) with a maximum of say three years. (I can explain this another time as |I believe the next entry into the commissioned ranks would be from platoon sergeants of around 7-10 years service through a differently designed course (probably shorter than a year).

If the young officer spends three years with his platoon then he will learn all the stuff you are talking about while being supported by an experienced platoon sergeant. Better to experience the active service as a platoon commander for three years than to have a few years in the ranks and then short time on operations as an officer IMHO. Three years is maximum with a platoon then its time to move on.